Fallout 3 is definitely a great game, both are really. But each are better at different things. Fallout 3 captures the world and atmosphere a lot better than new vegas, and I found myself exploring fallout 3's world a lot more than new vegas's. New Vegas definitely one up'ed 3 on storytelling and roleplaying. And with all the DLC's being intertwined that made the story that much more interesting. Personally I like New Vegas more than 3 because I like the stories/quests better, as well as having a more active mod community. But 3 will always be known as the necessary first step towards the future of the series.

_________________I like a woman who can make a well formatted spreadsheet.

For game-play definitely FNV but as for story I would have to choose fallout 3. I suppose it also doesn't help FO3's case that it was incredibly buggy for modern windows 7 machines, so I guess I lean more towards FNV. :<

By far New Vegas. F3 just never struck the right cord with me. FNV also feels a lot more fimilair to me because of where I'm from. Being in southwestern Oklahoma, there's a lot of open space with relatively view things between destinations and it's very sandy where I'm at plus the whole Cowboy thing is pretty much how I was raised anyway

I love both hands down. But, if I have to pick one as my favorite. It would be NV, because NV has a better roleplaying atmosphere. You can do whatever you want, pretty much. I'll always have fond memories of Fallout 3 though, as it was my first Fallout game. But I was young when I first played it.... I was scared every time I went into a metro.

Fallout 3 has greenness all over everything and I can never find my way around the capital wasteland, as opposed to Fallout New Vegas which is a (somewhat) barren desert where I never get lost (Except for dead Money and the interiors). It also has better mods.

I preferred Fallout 3 overall, but New Vegas had some better features,

FO3 had a better map, a better story, and better DLC. New Vegas had weapon mods, hardcore mode, more diverse weapons.

One of the things that makes me think less of NV is the map. It's practically a circle. When you start out, you can really only go in one direction because the other paths lead to death. If you get a picture of the NV map and color in the areas you cant walk, you have a very pathetic map. While I like the large empty spaces in NV, they are placed in horrible areas. I would like them to be between major areas so you have to pass through them, but they are located in areas you never need to go so they are just a waste of space.

NV DLC was fairly "meh" quality. OWB pretty much catered to energy weapons and science skill. I never use energy weapons and my science is usually fairly low so I found the DLC to be bad. HH was decent, but the man quest was far too short and the map was pretty small and travelling through it was obnoxious. DM had a great theme to it and had great plot and characters, but the invulnerable holograms and the ridiculously annoying radios made it almost unbearable. I would have preferred more quest time in the villa and more fighting/scavenging among the ghost people. LR was honestly crap. It was very confusing and the story only came out in very small fragments.

NV had better gameplay aspects like iron-sights, hardcore mode, and better weapons. It also had better mods.

FO3 had a much better map. It was very open. you could go in any direction. The further out you went, the tougher the enemies were. The metro tunnels were kind of annoying/dull to navigate, but the city ruins were fun. Megaton is also the bomb(see what I did there?). It's a great post apocalyptic town. It really has the "jury-rigged" feel to it what with everything being made of rusted scrap metal. It truly felt like a hub town. It felt very secure and homey.

FO3 DLC was far better. PL was fairly fun. It was fun to explore. TP was my favorite, but unfortunately it was a little too short. MZ was comical and fun. OA was an interesting new twist on gameplay. BS was great because it let you continue the game.

Fallout 3 anyday. Unfortunately, it is buggy as hell, which means that i cant play it without installing TTW. Regardless, I found it to be a far superior game in terms of substance and memorable characters. It was a truly unique experience, whereas I felt New Vegas kinda piggybacked on 3. Vegas had more stuff to do, but it wasnt nearly as interesting IMO as what 3's side quests were.

Fallout 3 FTW, the urban setting the constant battles around each block the radio music it all had me although the modifications for New Vegas were an amazing feature but FO3 is my favorite especially the story line/ plot

Fallout 3. One of the biggest things I want in a game is the vastness and amount of interesting things in a world. I want to explore and see new and unique things, and Fallout 3's world was VASTLY superior to that of NV. Yes I know that time constraints limited Obsidian but really that doesn't matter. We're not judging Obsidian we're judging Fallout: New Vegas, and in my personal opinion, it's worldspace was boring and lacked new things to do. Fallout 3 always had a new random encounter in a new area just around the corner and every experience was unique, New Vegas lacked this. Don't get me wrong I enjoy New Vegas but my experience with Fallout 3 was much more memorable and fun.

Another thing that I love about Fallout 3: The post-war 50's vibe was much more present in Fallout 3 than New Vegas. New Vegas seemed to lack a certain, post-apocalyptic 1950's feeling that I got in FO3. This aura of cliche optimism gone awash by nuclear fire isn't present in NV for understandable reasons. I mean NV is developing it's own cultures and it's atmosphere draws much more from the original games than FO3, which is alright and I think is perfectly fine but Fallout 3's atmosphere was much more appealing to my personal tastes.

_________________"Sheogorath is already inside each of us. You have already lost."

FO3. The First one, is an atmosphere, Inon Zur's music is pretty depressive, destroyed DC, more interesting characters. And every time i see FO4 gameplays, it reminds me of FO3, same atmosphere, same composer, same depressive feeling...

FNV is good, its mechanics, gunplay, is good, but, that "Western" feeling, damn, i don't like itIm get very sad and angry, when my Tale of Two Wastelands refused to launch....

Ah, and the story of course!Fuck that Legion_Benny_plat._chip_revenge_shit. During my FO3 experience, i really worried about "Dad"..

Fallout New Vegas Felt to me like a true fallout game, it's in the west, civilization is rebuilding, and you are just thrown in the middle of it. F03 feels more like the game takes place like 30 years after the bombs fell not 200. I believe if Obsidian was given 4 years instead of 18 months to make FNV they could have made one of the best damn games ever.

@"SpaceLord21" fallout 3 worldmap is copy pasted you say it has more encounters and loot places but most of it is copy pasted and its filled with dungeons that wherever they are train stations or bunkers look alike. There were barely any settlements in fallout 3, fallout nv one the other hand had alot of settlements that were connected with quests.

Sponsored content

Subject: Re: What do you like better, FalloutNV or Fallout 3? Today at 1:36 pm